DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 415 215 SP 037 724

AUTHOR McGriff, Toni Hughes; Bishop, Harold; Rice, MargaretTITLE Work-Related Behaviors of Elected and Appointed Local

Superintendents of Education in the State of Alabama.PUB DATE 1997-00-00NOTE 30p.; Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South

Educational Research Association (Memphis, TN, November12-14, 1997).

PUB TYPE Reports Research (143) Speeches/Meeting Papers (150)EDRS PRICE MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS Administrator Effectiveness; *Administrator Role; *Boards of

Education; Elementary Secondary Education; LeadershipQualities; Public School Teachers; Public Schools; SchoolDistricts; *Superintendents; Teacher Attitudes

IDENTIFIERS *Alabama; Appointive Positions; Elected Positions; TeacherLeaders; *Work Commitment

ABSTRACTThis study examined the perceptions of school board chairs

and teacher leaders regarding the work-related behaviors of Alabama's electedand appointed local school superintendents. A mailed survey soughtinformation on: demographics; work-related behaviors identified as essentialfor successful school system leadership; perceptions of superintendents'general leadership performance in the specific educational delivery system;and specific school improvement actions initiated/completed by thesuperintendent within the past 5 years. Participants were: (1) 80 currentschool board chairs of Alabama public school systems within each of Alabama'sschool districts that elected superintendents and appointed schoolsuperintendents and (2) teacher leaders from each of the 80 districts. Over50 percent completed the mailed survey, with fairly equal response from thetwo groups. Board chairs had more positive perceptions than did teacherleaders. There was no relationship between the groups regarding perceptionsof superintendents' general leadership performance. There were 23 frequentlydemonstrated work-related behaviors for superintendents, with appointedsuperintendents demonstrating them more often than elected superintendents.Elected superintendents initiated/completed specific improvement actions moreoften than did appointed superintendents. Both groups of superintendents hadinitiated/completed technology purchases, purchased new school buses,constructed new schools and other buildings, and provided instructionalmaterial and supplies to students. (Contains 17 references.) (SM)

********************************************************************************* Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made *

* from the original document. *

********************************************************************************

t

WORK-RELATED BEHAVIORS OF ELECTEDAND APPOINTED LOCAL SUPERINTENDENTSOF EDUCATION IN THE STATE OF ALABAMA

By

Toni Hughes McGriff, Scottsboro City SchoolsHarold Bishop, The University of AlabamaMargaret Rice, The University of Alabama

Presented at1997 MSERA ANNUAL MEETING

November 12, 1997Memphis, Tennessee

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and Improvement

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

This document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating it.

Minor changes have been made toimprove reproduction quality.

Points of view or opinions stated in thisdocument do not necessarily representofficial OERI position or policy.

PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE ANDDISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS

BEEN GRANTED BY

,2k-c-)1)wyp

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)

BEST COPY AVAilABLE

WORK-RELATED BEHAVIORS OF ELECTED AND APPOINTED

LOCAL SUPERINTENDENTS OF EDUCATION

IN THE STATE OF ALABAMA

In today's age of accountability, the position of superintendent of schools is a

position that demands unwavering courage, commitment to excellence, and effective

leadership behaviors. Alabama has traditionally been at or near the bottom of most

national measures of achievement in education. To raise those achievement levels the

leadership behaviors must be effective across the organization, but it is critical that the

superintendent possess a high degree of effectiveness in all areas. The behaviors

demonstrated by the superintendent set the tone for the entire system.

The position of superintendent of local educational agencies (LEA) in Alabama is

achieved in two ways. According to information provided by the Alabama State

Department of Education, achievement of superintendency for 87 systems is through a

selection and appointment process conducted by the local school board (B. Fannin,

personal communication, September 20, 1996). The remainder of the positions (40) are

achieved through election to the post by the voting public (B. Fannin, personal

communication, September 20, 1996). According to the Alabama Association of School

Boards, there is a common perception across the state is that there is a difference in the

effectiveness of the school leadership based on the route taken to the position of

superintendent (AASB, personal communication, June 10, 1996).

2

Although there is certainly a responsibility to respond to the demands of parents, students

and the community at large, the biggest pressure for appointed superintendents is to

answer to the needs articulated by the Board (C. Carrick, personal communication, May 8,

1996). The elected superintendent, on the other hand, may feel no particular loyalty to the

Board of Education (AASB, personal communication, June 10, 1996). He/she stood for

election in the same manner as did the board members, and the first allegiance may be

directly to the public. Realizing that election time for the position of superintendent will

come again in four years may influence elected superintendents to respond directly to the

public rather than to the board members. The need to respond to a different set of

"bosses" is just one area of difference between elected and appointed superintendents that

may affect their work-related behaviors.

Superintendents historically have been prey to community pressures, and both

elected and appointed superintendents receive pressure from varying sources. Bruce

(1895) wrote "The superintendent's position is a difficult one. He is a ready target for

unreasonable parents, disgruntled teachers, and officious school board members" (Myers,

1992, p. 96). Reaction to the pressures of the position will be evidenced in the behaviors

demonstrated and functions performed by the superintendent. These behaviors may be

indicative of how the superintendent achieved the position, whether by election or

appointment.

Gutherie and Reed (1986) said that "School administrators are expected to provide

leadership in important educational endeavors such as goal setting, organizational

planning, guiding instruction, implementing curriculum changes and evaluating personnel,

t,

3

while simultaneously managing concrete activities such as transportation, facilities,

maintenance, and food service" (p. 196).

Rothstein (1986) identified the tasks or work-related behaviors of school leaders

as the following:

1. Initiating behaviors - identifying problems and proposing solutions; new ways

to do things, organizing individuals and resources in new way.

2. Information-seeking behaviors - asking others to clarify intentions, feelings,

ideas.

3. Information-giving behaviors - illustrating points, using own experiences.

4. Opinion giving behaviors - giving own opinion when needed.

5. Elaborating behaviors - clarifying intentions and communicating using

examples to develop meaning.

6. Coordinating - showing followers how different ideas or suggestions relate to

one another.

7. Summary statements - bringing together ideas of similar content, themes, etc.

8. Feasibility/Testing - applying thoughts to real situations.

9. Evaluating - measuring group decisions against group standards.

10. Diagnosing - identifying sources of difficulties, next steps, problems to be

solved (p. 187).

Gousha (1991) in his "Analysis of Selected Competencies: Components,

Acquisition and Measurement Perceptions of Three Groups of Stakeholders in

Education", identified 12 core competencies for school administrators. His competencies

included the following:

4

1. clarity of values and integrity

2. communication skills

3. critical thinking skills

4. ability to learn from experience

5. cultural sophistication and cross-cultural understanding

6. empathy and respect for others

7. loyalty and intimacy beyond tolerance

8. sense of self in a social and historical sense

9. understanding of relevant critical and political issues

10. technical skills related to personnel and organizational management

11. creative ability to incorporate new research and information from various fields

12. foundational knowledge base (p. 20)

A number of researchers and organizations have developed lists of indicators,

behaviors, competencies and functions that effective school administrators should exhibit.

Review of a number of these indicate a common core of competencies that appear in many

studies, documents, and reports.

The State Department of Education for the State of Alabama(1991), developed a

list of competencies, indicators and definitions for superintendents. This document

includes those common competencies identified by research. The following nine

responsibilities for superintendents are listed in that document:

1. Serves as Chief Executive Officer of the School Board

2. Provides Educational Leadership of the Schools

5

3. Responsible for Personnel Management of the Schools

4. Responsible for the Financial Management of the Schools

5. Responsible for Community Relations

6. Responsible for Management of School System Resources

7. Responsible for Communications and Interpersonal Relations

8. Provides Model for Professional Development and Leadership

9. Performs Professional Responsibilities.

Behaviors/tasks/functions to be performed by Alabama superintendents as

identified in the "Competencies, Indicators and Definitions for Superintendents" include

the following:

1. Recommends actions to the school board and implements policies of the school

board.

2. Reports to the school board the status of programs, personnel and operations.

3. Performs duties as chief executive officer

4. Communicates vision/mission to staff, students, and parent/guardians.

5. Provides for supervision, evaluation and professional growth of all personnel.

6. Supervises the planning, implementation, and evaluation of curriculum and

instruction.

7. Establishes goals for student achievement.

8. Develops and implements a comprehensive personnel plan.

9. Assigns, orients, and inducts personnel to schools and offices

10. Seeks sufficient funding for school system

7

6

11. Prepares budget.

12. Ensures compliance with federal, state and local laws and policies.

13. Establishes and maintains procedures for procurement and fixed assets control

of equipment and supplies.

14. Develops and implements a system wide plan for community relations.

15. Utilizes local media in community relations

16. Models positive community involvement.

17. Manages school facilities.

18. Manages pupil personnel services.

19. Implements policies and programs relating to student conduct and discipline.

20. Ensures the health and safety of students

21. Speaks clearly, correctly, and coherently.

22. Writes clearly, correctly, and coherently.

23. Establishes effective communication processes and interpersonal relationships.

24. Improves professional knowledge and skills.

25. Takes a leadership role in improving education.

26. Implements federal, state and local laws, policies, and procedures.

27. Performs duties in an effective manner.

Effective educational leaders are crucial to the achievement of students. In

Alabama the leadership of school districts comes from either appointment or election to

the post. It is important to know if the method of acquisition is correlated to the degree of

effectiveness exhibited by the appointed and elected superintendents through their work-

related behaviors.

7

Statement of Problem

A review of the literature indicates that no studies have been conducted regarding

the work-related behaviors exhibited by Alabama local school superintendents relative to

the method by which they assumed their position as superintendent. Studies relative to

comparisons of elected and appointed superintendents have not been conducted utilizing

the perceptions of subjects such as board chairs, teacher leaders or government leaders.

Some studies have been conducted regarding the selection of superintendents in

Alabama. Fanning (1989) in his "An Analysis of Those Factors Which Influence the

Selection of Appointed Superintendents of Education in the State of Alabama" reported

only on appointed superintendents. Holmes (1992) conducted a study of the self

perceptions of elected and appointed superintendents in Alabama regarding their

leadership style, leadership range, and leadership adaptability. Conway (1995 ) studied the

specific job functions of superintendents in five southeastern states, the only remaining

states that had both elected and appointed superintendents at the time of his research..

There should be more research in the area of work-related behaviors exhibited by

elected and appointed superintendents in Alabama school systems as perceived by those

groups which work closely with the superintendents.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions of school board chairs

and teacher leaders regarding the work-related behaviors of Alabama local school

superintendents. School board chairpersons are in a position to observe the behavior,

decision making, and general effectiveness of the superintendent, and, as part of their

duties, annually evaluate the superintendent of their district. Their input helped to

8

discriminate work-related behaviors for Alabama superintendents and to discriminate

differences between the appointed and elected superintendents.

Teacher leaders work directly with superintendents through the implementation of

the instructional program of a school district. Additionally, they are often involved in

decisions regarding policies and practices affecting personnel in the school systems.

Because of their unique position as subordinates, they have first-hand information about

typical job-related behaviors of their superintendent.

Null Hypotheses

Null Hypothesis 1. There shall be no significant difference (p < .05) in the

responses of subjects regarding the specific work-related behaviors practiced by appointed

and elected superintendents.

Null Hypothesis 2. There shall be no significant difference ( p < .05) in the

perceptions of school board chairs and teacher leaders regarding the work-related

behaviors demonstrated by superintendents.

Null Hypothesis 3. There will be no significant difference (p < .05) in the

perceptions of school board chairs and teacher leaders regarding the general leadership

performance tasks that have been initiated/completed under the direction of their

superintendents.

Research Questions

Research Question 1. What are the most frequently practiced behaviors by elected

and appointed superintendents?

9

Research Question 2. Will the responses of the subjects reveal that

superintendents demonstrate those work-related behaviors that are identified as desirable

by the authorities?

Research Question 3. Will respondents identify a higher number of educational

improvement actions as having been initiated/completed by elected or appointed

superintendents?

Research Question 4. What specific educational improvement actions were

initiated/completed by elected and appointed superintendents?

Significance of the Study

Currently, there is little or no research available to provide information on the

differences in elected and appointed superintendents relative to work-related behaviors

demonstrated by each. Decisions made by these school leaders directly impact thousands

of children and adults in Alabama annually. It is important to determine if there is a

difference in the behaviors exhibited by the elected and the appointed superintendent in

Alabama school systems.

Perceptions of school board chairs and teacher leaders regarding school district

superintendent behaviors provided valuable information for school boards and citizens

across Alabama. The implications of the study are as follows:

1. The study identified work-related behaviors of superintendents that could

indicate successful leadership for Alabama public schools.

2. The study discriminated the behaviors of superintendents relative to their

achievement of the position.

1 '1

10

3. The study identified specific general leadership areas which needed

improvement.

Methodology of Study

For the purpose of conducting this study, a number of separate activities were

conducted. The specific activities which were conducted included the following:

1. A comprehensive review of literature on the subject of the superintendency

was conducted.

2. A survey instrument was developed as a result of information gained from the

review of literature.

3. The reliability and validity of the instrument were obtained through pilot

testing of the instrument and through the review of the instrument by a panel of

experts in the area of school supervision and instruction.

4. The population and sample to be included in the study were identified.

5. The instrument was distributed to the selected sample.

6. The data received using the survey instrument were analyzed through the use

of appropriate statistical techniques.

7. The results were summarized and reported.

8. The findings, conclusions, and recommendations were presented.

A comprehensive review of literature on the subject of the superintendency was

conducted. Specific focus was placed on the effective and desirable work-related

behaviors demonstrated by school leaders. Other areas of the literature search focused on

identifying the most critical work-related functions for school superintendents. Additional

11

review was conducted on the history of the superintendency and the development of

appointed and elected superintendents and the perceptions of effectiveness of each.

The survey contained questions and statements designed to obtain information

concerning the research questions and hypotheses. Items were formatted to seek

responses through the use of a Likert-type scale.

A panel of experts in the field of school supervision and instruction , and

government leadership were used to conduct a test of validity. Experts included subjects

who were currently serving or had served within the last five years in positions of school

board chairs, teacher leaders, or government leaders. A100% return rate on the

appropriateness of items was received. The expert panel judged the instrument to be valid

based on its clarity, relevance, and general usefulness relative to identifying the work-

related behaviors of Alabama school superintendents.

To determine reliability of the instrument, a pilot study was conducted with 24

randomly selected subjects from the three sample groups. As a result of the pilot study,

the government leader group was excluded from the main study. The return rate was less

than 1% for this group of respondents, and their responses were primarily "Don't Know."

The sample for the research study was selected from the two remaining

populations. The first group consisted of current school board chairs of Alabama public

school systems. The second group consisted of teacher leaders. Subjects from among

school board chairs were purposefully selected from each of the 40 school districts in

Alabama that elect the superintendent. Additionally, 40 board chairs were randomly

selected from the 87 systems that appoint school superintendents. Random selection was

continued until there was an equal number of board chairs representing elected and

13

12

appointed superintendents. The selection process was randomly conducted until subjects

were matched based on the general demographic characteristics of the school system. The

Cluster System designed by the Alabama State Department of Education was used to

achieve this match.

This Cluster System groups school systems by socioeconomic indices and by size

based on enrollment. Socioeconomic indices include the number of free and reduced

student meals reported in the system, and the number of dollars generated by ad valorem

mills on property in the city or county. These indices are indicated through a numerical

grouping from 1-4. The most affluent is indicated by 1, while 4 indicates the least affluent.

Size is divided into two categories - Large and Small. Large is over 5,000 students and

Small is under 5,000 enrolled students. For example, a system in category 4L is a large

system that is very poor. The fallacy of this Cluster System for the study is the absence of

any elected superintendent system in the 1S category. All superintendents in this category

are appointed. Using the Cluster System enabled the researcher to match the remaining 40

systems demographically.

The second group of subjects was selected from the teacher leader population.

The president of the local Alabama Education Association affiliate for each of the 80

systems in the study was purposefully selected based on their position as leaders for the

local professional organizations.

The study was stratified by appointment of superintendent and by election of

superintendent, and further stratified by school board chairs and teacher leaders. The total

population surveyed numbered 160 possible respondents (80 board chairs, 80 teacher

leaders).

1 -(

13

The data from the survey were collected, scored, and analyzed. Descriptive

statistics were used to summarize the data for research questions. Inferential statistics

were used to assess the perceptions of the respondents. The null hypotheses were tested

using t-test procedures and chi-square procedures provided by the Research Assistance

Center at The University of Alabama. The results were recorded in narrative and tabular

form. Conclusions were drawn according to the survey instrument's reliability and results

of the data obtained.

Limitations of the Study

1. The study was limited to the perceptions of school board chairs and teacher

leaders of selected public school systems in Alabama.

2. Although research subjects should be knowledgeable in recognizing and

identifying desirable work-related behaviors of superintendents, their responses are subject

to interpretation and personal bias.

Assumptions of the Study

The assumptions for this study were as follows:

1. The completion of the survey was dependent on the willingness of respondents

to give honest and sincere perspectives.

2. The perceptions of the subjects are significant with regard to the identification

of work-related behaviors demonstrated by elected and appointed superintendents of local

schools in Alabama.

Review of Related Literature

A review of related literature included focus on historical information, leadership,

duties, responsibilities and functions of superintendents, elected and appointed

14

superintendent states, and support for electing versus appointing local school

superintendents. The following is a synopsis of the review.

1. Creation of the Superintendency - Early superintendents served primarily as

representatives or assistants to the board of education which was comprised of

local lay persons who supervised the schools. As early as 1804 the term

"superintendent" was used, and by the 1830's it had become a common term

for the leader of local schools.

2. Leadership Indicators of Superintendents - A plethora of definitions,

descriptions and characterizations have been used to identify the essence of

leadership. The most often observed ingredient involves an influence process

that is exerted by the leader over followers.

3. Duties, Responsibilities, and Work-Related Functions of the

Superintendent - Numerous duties, responsibilities, and functions of the

superintendent are identified in the literature. The key function may be

coordination (Fensch and Wilson, 1964); communication (Dunigan, 1980,

Pinter and Ogawa (1981); or management (Cuban, 1984). Hoyle (1989)

posited that the 21st century superintendent must possess human skills,

technical skills, and conceptual skills. Thomas E. Glass (1992) identified

mentoring, discrimination, hiring, minorities, change agentry, and moving and

shaking as critical characteristics. Superintendents themselves listed human

relations adeptness, data management and technology awareness; financial

skills, knowledge of social and education reorganization processes; other

15

conflict management skills; political skills, and research ability. (Cuningham and

Hentges ,1982). The Alabama State Department of Education (1991) developed

the following list of competencies for superintendents: Chief executive officer of

the school board; educational leadership; personnel management; financial

management; community relations; resource management; communication and

interpersonal relations; professional development leadership; and, professional

responsibilities.

4. Elected Superintendents Versus Appointed Superintendents - Schuh and

Herrington (1990) found that proponents of superintendent election assert that

the process maintains public control of schools, is more responsive to citizens'

needs, and decreases high turnover and abuses of power. Those in favor of

appointment point to the school board's personnel selection qualifications, the

efficiency of the decision-making process, and the creation of a professional

rather than a political process.

5. States Which Elect Public School Superintendents - Only fours states

continue to elect public school superintendents - Alabama, Florida, Mississippi,

and South Carolina.

6. Support for Appointing District Superintendents and Support for

Electing District Superintendents - The issue can be summarized as a

contrast between having access to a larger pool of more highly qualified

candidates and direct public control of the school.

16

Description of the Survey Instrument

Data were gathered using a survey instrument derived from the review of literature

and developed by the author of this study. The survey instrument consisted of four

specific sections. Section One of the instrument sought demographic information.

Section Two of the instrument was divided into eight subsections. Each subsection

identified work-related behaviors that authorities have identified as essential for successful

school system leadership. This section consisted of 32 items. These items were designed

to use statements that required responses through the use of a Likert-type scale Always,

Usually, Sometimes, Never, and Don't Know (A, U, S, N, DK). Items from these

sections provided the data for the analysis for Hypotheses 1 and 2 and Research Questions

1 and 2. Section Three sought the responses of subjects relative to their perceptions of

the genral leadership performance of the superintendent in specific educational delivery

system areas. Respondents were provided three choices of responses. These choices

were Yes, No, Don't Know Y, N, DK. Items 33-39 on the instrument provided data for

this section. Items from Section Three provided data for the analysis of Hypothesis 3.

The final section (Section Four) of the instrument requested that respondents identify

specific school improvement actions initiated/completed by the superintendent within the

last five years. Respondents simply placed a check mark beside those actions listed on the

instrument. Items from this section were used to respond to Research Questions 3 and 4.

Validity and Reliability of the Research Instrument

The instrument was subjected to a review by a panel of judges. Each of the five

judges possessed one of the following credentials: (a) experience as a superintendent,

assistant superintendent, school board member, or teacher leader; and, (b) active in one of

17

these positions during the past five years. The instrument was found to be valid based on

clarity, relevance, and general usefulness relative to identifying the work-related behaviors

of Alabama school superintendents.

A pilot study was conducted to establish reliability of the research instrument. A

group of 24 persons who possessed experiences similar to those of the subjects was

selected for this activity. The pilot study established the reliability of the of the items on

the instrument by using Cronbach's Coefficient Alpha (Hinkle, Wiersma, & Jurs, 1992). A

78% return rate resulted in a Cronbach Coefficient Alpha for RAW variables at 0.969271

and for standardized variables at 0.971563, indicating a very strong positive relationship.

A cover letter, survey instrument, informed consent form, and a pre-addressed,

stamped envelope were mailed to each member of the sample population. A return rate of

58% was achieved. Data were collected, scored, and analyzed. Approved statistical

techniques and procedures including t-test, chi-square, percentages, and frequencies were

used to analyze the data.

Summary of Findings and Conclusions

Demographic Findings and Conclusions

Demographic Findings

1. A slightly higher number of school board chairs responded to the survey than

did teacher leaders. The return rate for board chairs was 60%, while the return

rate for teacher leaders was 55%.

2. County school systems accounted for 15% more of the responses than did the

city school systems.

9

18

3. Respondents representing school systems with fewer than 5,000 students

accounted for 61.5% of the return. Systems with enrollments between 5,000

and 10,000 students equaled 30.8%. Only 3.3% of the systems had

enrollments between 10,000 and 20,000; and only 4.4% of the systems had

enrollments of more than 20,000 students.

4. Appointed superintendents accounted for the majority of responses at 57.6%.

5. An overwhelming majority (94.5%) of superintendents are male.

6. Length of service for superintendents was fairly equal from 3 years or less up

to 10 years, with 87% in this category.

7. The majority of superintendents in this study hold either a specialist or

doctorate degree. Of the 33 reported doctorate level superintendents, only

three are elected superintendents.

Conclusions

Based on the results of analysis of the findings related to demographic data, it was

concluded that school board chairs are only slightly more likely to respond to survey

materials than are teacher leaders. Subjects from county school systems are more likely to

respond to survey materials than are subjects from city systems. Most of the school

systems represented are small systems and have an appointed superintendent. An

overwhelming number of superintendents are male and have served from one to 10 years.

A majority of superintendents hold advanced degrees, and most appointed superintendents

hold a doctorate degree.

2 D

19

Null Hypotheses' Findings and Conclusions

Hypothesis 1

There shall be no significant difference in the responses of subjects regarding the

specific work-related behaviors demonstrated by appointed and elected superintendents.

A t-test procedure was used to analyze Hypothesis 1.

Findings

A significant difference was determined to exist between the responses of subjects

regarding the specific work-related behaviors demonstrated by appointed and elected

superintendents. The group represented as elected superintendents had a mean of 94.49,

and the group represented as appointed superintendents had a mean of 109.25. This result

indicates that respondents perceive the appointed superintendent as demonstrating a

higher number of desirable work-related behaviors than they perceive the elected

superintendents as demonstrating.

Conclusion

Based on the results of analysis of findings related to Hypothesis 1, it was

concluded that perceptions differ regarding work-related behaviors of appointed and

elected superintendents.

Hypothesis 2

There shall be no significant difference in the perceptions of school board chairs

and teacher leaders regarding the work-related behaviors demonstrated by

superintendents.

A t-test procedure was used to analyze Hypothesis 2.

21

20

Findings

A statistically significant difference was found between the perceptions of school

board chairs and teacher leaders regarding work-related behaviors demonstrated by

superintendents. Alpha equaled 0.0002, which is less than 0.05, the identified probability

value for analysis.

Conclusion

Based on the results of analysis of findings related to Hypothesis 2, it was

concluded that board chairs have a more positive perception regarding the work-related

behaviors demonstrated by superintendents than teacher leaders have.

Hypothesis 3

There shall be no significant relationship between the perceptions of school board

chairs and teacher leaders regarding the general leadership performance tasks that have

been initiated/completed under the direction of their superintendent.

Chi-square procedures were used to analyze Hypothesis 3.

Findings

1. A relationship was found in two areas--job descriptions for every position, and

capital improvement as a top priority for the school system.

2. The remaining six areas did not show a significant relationship between the

groups and their agreement on general leadership performance.

Conclusion

Based on the results of analysis of findings related to Hypothesis 3, it was

concluded that no significant relationship existed between the groups relating to general

leadership performance of the superintendent.

21

Research Questions' Findings and Conclusions

Research Question 1

What are the most frequently demonstrated work-related behaviors by elected and

appointed superintendents?

Frequency and percentage techniques were utilized for research question analysis.

Findings

1. Of the 33 work-related behaviors, 10 behaviors were identified as being

demonstrated less than 80% of the time.

2. Those behaviors were identified in the following categories: Promotes Student

Growth, Fosters Positive School Climate, Provides Leadership,

Leads/Manages Personnel, and Promotes Community Relations.

3. Of the 33 behaviors, appointed superintendents were perceived as

demonstrating the following 23 behaviors frequently:

a. Reviews reports on student achievement, attendance and graduation;

b. Assesses and sets priorities on student needs;

c. Articulates/disseminates high expectations for student learning and

teaching quality;

d. Promotes academic rigor and excellence for staff and students;

e. Encourages and fosters self-esteem in staff and students;

f. Provides direction and support for periodic review of curriculum;

g. Provides direction and support for periodic review of school policies

and procedures;

e7:3

22

h. Develops and offers opportunities that respond to teacher needs for

professional development;

i. Encourages and facilitates the use of new technology to improve

teaching and learning;

j. Defines and delegates administrative authority and responsibility to

certified and non-certified personnel;

k. Complies with all applicable personnel policies and rules;

1. Prepares appropriate budgets and cost estimates;

m. Maintains accurate fiscal records;

n. Applies the legal requirements for personnel selection, development,

retention, and dismissal;

o. Plans for facilities needs and makes recommendations for maintenance,

modernization, and replacement of buildings as needed;

p. Seeks adequate funding for needs;

q. Ensures equitable distribution of resources;

r. Develops and communicates guidelines for student conduct;

s. Enforces the discipline policy of the system;

t. Promotes a collaborative approach to discipline involving staff,

students and parents;

u. Interacts with the board in an ethical, sensitive, professional manner;

v. Communicates clearly and substantively to the board; and,

w. Recommends policies to improve student learning and district

performance.

23

Elected superintendents were perceived to demonstrate only three behaviors

frequently. Those three behaviors are the following:

a. Reviews reports on student achievement, attendance, and graduation;

b. Maintains accurate fiscal records; and,

c. Develops/communicates guidelines for student conduct.

Conclusion

Based on the results of analysis of findings related to Research Question 1, it was

concluded that there are 23 most frequently demonstrated work-related behaviors for

Alabama superintendents. The appointed superintendent demonstrated those behaviors

more frequently than did the elected superintendent.

Research Question 2

Will the responses of the subjects reveal that superintendents demonstrate those

work-related behaviors that are identified as desirable by the authorities?

Frequency and percentage methods were used to determine whether

superintendents demonstrate the desirable work-related behaviors.

Findings

1. Appointed superintendents achieved more than 50% on all 33 behaviors.

2. Elected superintendents achieved less than 50% on four behaviors--Promotes

and models multicultural and ethnic understanding; Formulates strategic plans, goals, and

change efforts with staff and community; Recognizes and rewards exemplary performance;

and, Develops and implements a system-wide plan for community relations.

Conclusions

24

Based on the results of analysis of findings related to Research Question 2, it was

concluded that Alabama superintendents do demonstrate the work-related behaviors

identified by the authorities. It was also concluded that appointed superintendents

demonstrate a higher number of desirable work-related behaviors than do elected

superintendents.

Research Question 3

Will respondents identify a higher number of educational improvement actions as

having been initiated/completed by elected or appointed superintendents?

Frequency and percentage methods were used to determine which groups

initiated/completed a higher number of improvement actions.

Findings

1. Elected superintendents took specific improvement actions 64% of the time.

2. Appointed superintendents took specific improvement actions 58% of the time.

Conclusions

Based on the results of analysis of findings related to Research Question 3, it was

concluded that elected superintendents initiated and/or completed specific improvement

actions more often than appointed superintendents did.

Research Question 4

What specific educational improvement actions were initiated/completed by

elected and appointed superintendents?

Frequency and percentage methods were used to determine what improvement

actions were initiated/completed by elected and appointed superintendents.

25

Findings

1. Thirty-four percent of appointed superintendents had constructed a new

school, while 26% of elected superintendents had begun a new school.

2. Both appointed and elected superintendents achieved high scores in the area of

technology purchases.

3. A 22% difference in the area of school bus purchases was observed.

4. Only 28% of appointed superintendents had constructed system buildings, but

54% of elected superintendents had constructed system buildings.

5. Fifty-seven percent of appointed superintendents provided new textbooks for

all students, but only 46% of elected superintendents made the same provision.

Conclusions

Based on the results of analysis of findings related to Research Question 4, it was

concluded that both elected and appointed superintendents have initiated/completed

technology purchases, purchased new school buses, constructed new schools and other

system buildings, and provided instructional material and supplies to students. It was also

concluded that a difference exists in the frequency these behaviors are demonstrated.

Implications For Decision Making

Results of this study imply a need for additional research, and for a broader

understanding of the work-related behaviors of elected and appointed superintendents in

Alabama. A difference in the perceptions of school board chairs and teacher leaders

regarding appointed and elected superintendents is evident. The results indicate that

appointed superintendents are perceived as demonstrating more desirable work-related

behaviors than are elected superintendents. Furthermore, appointed superintendents hold

26

higher degrees than do elected. Both groups demonstrate some desirable work-related

behaviors, but appointed are perceived as demonstrating more of those identified

behaviors more frequently than are elected superintendents.

All superintendents must become more committed to positive community relations

and focus on strategic planning of goals and objectives. Efforts should be made to

improve multicultural and ethnic understanding. A further implication of this study is that

effective leaders must recognize and reward exemplary performance of subordinates.

Superintendents should focus on these areas for an improved school system.

Based on the results of this study, politicians and educational leaders should be

aware that the majority of local school superintendents in Alabama are demonstrating the

work-related behaviors that have been identified by the authorities as desirable. They

should also be aware that appointed superintendents are perceived as demonstrating a

higher number of those behaviors than are the elected superintendents.

The implication for Alabama educational leaders is that a serious consideration

should be given as to the advisability of continuing with the system of electing some local

school superintendents. Based on the results of this study, legislators, the Alabama School

Board Association, the Alabama Education Association, and other organizations

committed to excellence in education in Alabama should seriously consider the

abolishment of the elected superintendency.

27

References

Alabama State Department of Education. (1991, September). Competencies,indicators and definitions for superintendents. Montgomery, AL: Alabama StateDepartment of Education.

Conway, C. A. (1995). A study of public school superintendents in fivesoutheastern states: Perceptions regarding specific job functions. Unpublished doctoraldissertation, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa.

Cuban, L. (1984, May). Transforming the frog into a prince: Effective schoolsresearch, policy, and practice at the district level. Harvard Educational Review 54 129-151.

Cunningham, L., & Hentges, J. (1982). The American school superintendency1982: A summary report. Arlington, VA: American Association of SchoolAdministrators.

Dunigan, P. (1980). Administrative behavior of school superintendents: Adescriptive study. Journal of Educational Administration, 18, 5-26.

Fanning, K. L. (1989). An analysis of those factors which influence the selectionof appointed superintendents of education in Alabama. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa.

Fensch, E. & Wilson, R. E. (1964). The superintendency team. Columbus, OH:Merrill Books.

Glass, T. (1992). The 1992 study of the American school superintendency:America's education leaders in a time of reform. American Association of SchoolAdministrators, Arlington, VA.

Gousha, R. P., & Mannan, G. (1991, August). Analysis of selected competencies:Components, acquisition and measurement perceptions of three groups of stakeholders ineducation. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council of Professorsof Educational Administration, Fargo, ND.

Gutherie, J. W., & Reed, R. J. (1986). Educational administration and policy:Effective leadership for American educators. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

#

28

Hinkle, E. E., Weisma, W., & Jurs, S. G. (1992). Applied statistics for thebehavioral sciences. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin Co.

Holmes, J. B. (1992). The self-perception of elected and appointedsuperintendents in Alabama regarding their leadership style. leadership range. andleadership adaptability. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Alabama,Tuscaloosa.

Hoyle, J. R. (1989, January). Preparing the 21st century superintendent. Phi DeltaKappan, 10(5), 376-379.

Myers, M. D. (1992). Effective schools and the superintendency: Perception andpractice. Contemporary Education. 63 (2), 96-101.

Pitner, N. J., & Ogawa R. (1981). Organizational leadership: The case of theschool superintendent. Educational Administration Quarterly 17 (2), 45-66.

Rothstein, W. W. (1986). Leadership dynamics: Advances Perspectives in schooladministration. Lathan, MD: University Press of America.

Schuh, J. & Herrington, C. (1990, November). Electing versus appointing districtsuperintendents of schools. Research Park, NC: Southeastern Eductional ImprovementLab.

U.S. Department of EducationOffice of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI)

Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC)

REPRODUCTION RELEASE

I. DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION:

(Specific Document)

ERIC'

-Reece 4i `t-r-c-°2 A-->ap,,7- /1-

Author(s): T-6 s

Corporate Source:Publication Date:

//hz_/ 77

II. REPRODUCTION RELEASE:

In order to disseminate as widely as possible timely and significant materials of interest to the educational community, documents announced

in the monthly abstract journal of the ERIC system, Resources in Education (RIE), are usually made available-to users in. microfiche, reproduced .

paper copy, and electronic/optical media, and sold through the ERIC Document Reproduction Service (EDRS) or other ERIC vendors. Credit is

given to the source of each document, and, if reproduction release is granted, one of the following notices is affixed to the document.

If permission is granted to reproduce and disseminate the identified document, please CHECK ONE of the following two options and sign at

the bottom of the page.

[dI

Check hereFor Level 1 Release:Permitting reproduction inmicrofiche (4' x 6' film) orother ERIC archival media(e.g., electronic or optical)and paper copy.

Signhere-)please

The sample sticker shown below will be

affixed to all Level 1 documents

PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE ANDDISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL

HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)

Level 1

The sample sticker shown below will be

affixed to all Level 2 documents

PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE ANDDISSEMINATE THIS

MATERIAL IN OTHER THAN PAPERCOPY HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)

Level 2

Documents will be processed as indicated provided reproduction quality permits. If permission

to reproduce is granted, but neither box is checked, documents will be processed at Level 1.

nCheck here

For Level 2 Release:Permitting reproduction inmicrofiche (4' x 6' film) orother ERIC archival media(e.g., electronic or optical),but not in paper copy.

I hereby grant to the EducationalResources Information Center (ERIC) nonexclusive permission to reproduce and disseminate

this document as indicated above. Reproduction from the ERIC microfiche or electronic/optical media by persons other than

ERIC employees and its system contractors requires permission from the copyright holder. Exception is made for non-profit

reproduction by libraries and otherservice agencies to satisfy information needs of educators in response to discrete inquiries.'

Signature:

OrgantzallFacfaress:oo Z. 5

06 S See, LVa`ee 5 h oro A-_

Printed Name/Position/11de:

ion; W.Tele-Phone:

7-05- Z Z.?Address:

rFAY:

Date:

////2_/77(over)

III. DOCUMENT AVAILABILITY INFORMATION (FROM NON-ERIC SOURCE): 4 ; 1.

If permission to reproduce is not granted to ERIC, or, if you wish ERIC to cite the availability of the document from another source,

please provide the following information regarding the availability of the document. (ERIC will not announce a document unless it is

publicly available, and a dependable source can be specified. Contributors should also be aware that ERIC selection criteria are

significantly more stringent for_ documents that cannot be made available through EDRS.)

Publisher/Distributor:

Address:

Price:

IV. REFERRAL OF ERIC TO COPYRIGHT/REPRODUCTION RIGHTS HOLDER:

If the right to grant reproduction release is held by someone other than the addressee, please proVide the appropriate name and address:

Name:

Address:

V. WHERE TO SEND THIS FORM:

Send this form to the following ERIC Clearinghouse:

ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation

210 O'Boyle HallThe Catholic University of America

Washington, DC 20064

However, if solicited by the ERIC Facility, or if making an unsolicited contribution to ERIC, return this form (and the document being

contributed) to:

ERIC Processing and Reference Facility1100 West Street, 2d Floor

Laurel, Maryland 20707-3598

Telephone: 301-497-4080Toll Free: 800-799.3742

FAX: 301-953-0263e-mail: ericfac @inet.ed.gov

WWW: http://ericfac.piccard.csc.com

(Rev. 6/96)